Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Grayndler proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government's cuts to infrastructure investment in Australia.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'For an "infrastructure prime minister", Tony Abbott's efforts have been pathetic.'" They are not my words; they are the words of the business commentator Alan Kholer in a piece written immediately after this year's budget. In another piece he said:

… the detail of the budget papers show a real decline in spending in the Infrastructure and Regional Development portfolio of 11.2 per cent between 2014-15 and 2018-19.

This budget has blown the lid on Tony Abbott's big infrastructure con. After more than 18 months of broken promises, dodgy process and the magical infrastructure re-announcement tour, the figures are in. Infrastructure funding in this budget has been cut by $2 billion over this year and next, with a funding decline by 11.2 per cent over the forwards.

Let's have a look at the real impact here: Victoria, $812 million cut; Queensland, $613 million cut; South Australia, $318 million cut, Tasmania, $31 million cut; ACT, $12 million cut—big iconic projects cut. The Pacific Highway was cut by $129 million in 2015-16, in what was previously promised in their own budget last year. The Bruce Highway: because they elected a Labor government, what was the response? Cut Bruce Highway funding by $93 million from what was previously promised last year.

There is nothing for public transport, nothing for high-speed rail and nothing for freight rail beyond the $300 million that we put in the 2013 budget for the inland rail link between Brisbane and Melbourne. The Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program—cut, with only $1 million of last year's $48 million budget actually spent.

This is even with their own programs. They did come up with something new last year: the Bridges Renewal Program. But this year they cut it by $60 million! And if you want an example of mean-spirited stupidity that is dangerous, they cut the Seatbelts on Regional School Buses program by $1 million a year—cut! Talk about risk management! What a stupid decision for any government to make!

Last Friday, they decided that because Victoria had just eight per cent of infrastructure spending in the budget they would make an announcement. They pretended it was new. They were going to put $150 million into the Western Ring Road, known as the M80. The problem is that last year they cut it by $500 million. It is a great way to get new announcements: you cut $500 million in the 2014 budget, you put $150 million back and you say, 'We are investing in infrastructure.' Genius! Why didn't we think of that? Absolutely extraordinary!

Today, the Prime Minister and other ministers stood up and spoke about the Midland Highway in Tasmania. They said, 'We're putting $400 million in.' But there was $500 million in the budget before! That is less. They said they were funding irrigation, except they took that from rail freight in Tasmania in order to fund the irrigation program. There is nothing that they do that is not taking more, giving less and then claiming it is new. It is an extraordinary performance.

This is the same mob—

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the money you took off the F3 to M2? You never funded it Albo! You did nothing about it!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This moron raises the F3 to M2! Thank you—come in spinner! There was $405 million in the 2013 budget. The MOU was signed between myself and Minister Gay in June 2013. They changed the name to NorthConnex. It is not a new project; it is just a new name, son! It is the same project, begun and signed under us.

When we took office we were 20th in the OECD for investment in infrastructure. When we left office we were first. We doubled the roads budget, we increased the rail budget by more than 10 times and we committed more to urban public transport than all governments combined from Federation right through to 2007. What have those opposite done? In spite of the fact that Infrastructure Australia under them actually produced something at last—they produced something spooky about urban congestion and the cost to the national economy of not dealing with urban congestion—what did we see from the government? A complete refusal to invest in any urban public transport and a complete refusal to engage in our cities.

We actually embarrassed them into producing the State of Australian cities report for 2014. It had been produced in 2011, 2012 and 2013. It had been downloaded—the minister at the table knows what is coming!—three million times. So they put out a tender on AusTender. We found that on the website. It said it was going to be published just in time for Christmas—for the stockings!—on 15 December. It was printed—I have seen the cover of it. And yet what happened in Senate estimates?

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you had better leaks you would have got it!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You don't think we've got it? It's all about the timing, sunshine! They printed the State of Australian cities 2014 report, paid $11,000 for the printing of it and produced it. But it is now June, and where is it? At Senate estimates, the secretary of his department said that it was 'collecting dust' and that the minister has advised them not to release it. That is new research. Why? Because it probably mentions that they have to do something about urban congestion, they have to do something about public transport and they have to do something about planning in our cities, and that they should be funding the Cross River Rail, they should be funding the Melbourne Metro and that they should be making sure that Infrastructure Australia guides where the investment goes.

And yet what we have also seen in this budget—in spite of their promises—is that they have not listened to Infrastructure Australia. They funded the East West Link to the tune of $3 billion, with an advance payment of $1½ billion and with a cost-benefit analysis of 0.45. I will explain it: you pay a dollar and you get 45c back. It is not that complex. That is what the analysis showed—a dud project. They took money from projects like the Western Ring Road and from projects like the managed motorways program, that had a cost-benefit ratio of greater than five, and from the Melbourne Metro and put it into a dud project. Then they made an advance payment to the Victorian Napthine government to make their budget look better at a time when those opposite were cutting pensions, cutting education and cutting health and essential services. That is what they were responsible for.

So, they have learnt the lesson on Infrastructure Australia. They have finally produced a report that they have not released.

But now, in this budget, they have cut Infrastructure Australia's funding in half from $15 million a year to $8 million a year across the forward estimates. That is why the Leader of the Opposition announced a proposal in the budget reply to restore Infrastructure Australia to the centre of government, to fund projects in the Infrastructure Australia priority list. Like the former Treasurer did, like the former Labor government did, look at where it is going to produce the best investment and that is what should be directed. And we even promise to consult with the opposition on Infrastructure Australia appointments.

This nation needs a government that not only talks about infrastructure but that actually builds infrastructure, that builds roads, that builds rail lines—not just reannounce old projects and pretend it is doing something while it is actually cutting funding.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can see why he had so much support among the Labor branches. The contender is back and he is working hard. He is available if they are ready; there is no question—big speeches in the parliament. Unfortunately, like usual with the member for Grayndler, there is not much truth to the delivery. He gives a good speech but he does not actually give much truth in the speech. We will correct some of the false assertions that he has made and we will put on record exactly what this government is doing and why this could Prime Minister will be remembered as the infrastructure Prime Minister.

We will start with Labor's record because the member for Grayndler wanted to make much of it. He wanted to make much of his new-found love of cost-benefit analysis. Some do not remember, but the member for Grayndler was Deputy Prime Minister for a short period. But, during that time, he was also Minister for Communications. In fact, he claims that it was a golden era in communications policy. I think that is his claim. The only problem with the member for Grayndler's new-found love of cost-benefit analysis and economic analysis of government spending on infrastructure projects is he refused to allow Infrastructure Australia—or anyone for that matter—to do a cost-benefit analysis on the NBN. There was no cost-benefit analysis on the biggest spend on an infrastructure project in Australia's history. We are a bit sceptical about the genuine commitment from the member for Grayndler about cost-benefit analysis and economic assessments of projects before they are funded by government.

In respect of Labor's record when they were in government when it came to infrastructure, the first point we should make is that the Business Council of Australia's report card on Labor's stimulus package made it very clear that during that time that they increased spending. We remember the money they inherited from the Howard-Costello era that they spent during the GFC, the member for Lilley. Fourteen per cent of that money was spent on economic infrastructure. The rest of that money was spent on free money—the $900-cheques. The Pink Batts program was infrastructure under Labor as were overpriced school halls.

The member for Grayndler is fond of referring to the Global Competitiveness Index. We went and had a look at the Global Competitiveness Index and we looked at how Australia has performed. In 2007, the 2008-09 report of the global competitiveness index ranked Australia's overall quality of infrastructure as 25th in the world. In 2013, in the 2014-15 report, we dropped 10 places to 35th—that was during Labor's period in office. The IMD World Competitiveness Centre, in its yearbook, ranked Australia fifth best on basic infrastructure in 2007. By 2013, we had dropped to 22nd. In 2015, we are back to 18th. We have got work to do and we are doing that work.

What we have seen since we came to government, in last year's budget and in this year's budget, is some nearly $17 billion more spending over the forward estimates on infrastructure than Labor would have spent had they been re-elected.

The member for Grayndler is fond of claiming that there are no new projects in the budget. That is completely false. In fact, there are 85 or nearly 95 new projects under this government. We are focused on building more infrastructure for more jobs and a stronger Australia. The projects that are new and funded by this government include: WestConnex stage 2; the Perth Freight Link, a very exciting project in Western Australia, and there will be more to say about that project in the coming weeks—

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

I knew I would get the member for Perth going on that one. It was just a little fly-fishing exercise. Chuck her 20c and there you go. The North-South Corridor; the Darlington project, which, the member for Grayndler at one point said was a low priority project. We are funding that and the Torrens to Torrens project and we will have more to say about South Australia in the coming weeks. The Toowoomba bypass project is a project the member for Grayndler has never liked, has never supported. We know the Queensland government is working away on producing that and there will be announcements. There will be $1.2 billion spent on that project. The member for Grayndler does actually support the Western Sydney Infrastructure Plan as do some sitting on the backbench but the member for Chifley is not one who supports this.

There will be $3½ billion worth of roads in Western Sydney along with a new airport, the Western Sydney airport, the first airport in Western Sydney, delivered by the infrastructure Prime Minister. We have doubled the Roads to Recovery money with $350 million of new funding. We have doubled the Black Spots Program with $200 million of new funding. There will be $3 billion in a locked box to build the East West Link project. We want to do that because Infrastructure Australia's audit rightly identified—just like Sir Rod Eddington did and just like the Leader of the Opposition did twice in two submissions—Melbourne needs an additional east-west crossing.

As for public transport projects, we are funding public transport projects. We are funding the Sydney Rapid Transit Project, which will be a second harbour rail crossing and which will increase the public transport system's capacity by 60 per cent. We are contributing funding to that project. We are committing funding to infrastructure projects right across Australia and we have more to come. We will have more to come through the Asset Recycling initiative. The Victorian government will shortly announce their intentions with the Melbourne port; there will be a new infrastructure project out of that. We very much welcome the decision of the Western Australian government to sell the Fremantle port. There will be new infrastructure projects from that decision. The South Australian government has signed up to the Asset Recycling initiative, and we welcome that decision. Obviously, the New South Wales government will get first-mover advantage with the lease of its electricity assets and it will spend billions of dollars on new infrastructure projects.

We are getting on and building infrastructure projects right across the country. In the member for Bradfield's electorate, we are building the NorthConnex project.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

This is the thing with the member for Grayndler: he was very good at announcing his intention to do things, but he was not any good at delivering the projects. He was good at delivering things like the pink batts program and overpriced school halls but not real infrastructure. We are spending billions of dollars in the cities; we are spending billions of dollars in the regions; we are doing it to improve Australia.

We are also reforming the system. The Productivity Commission report last year made recommendations about how we could improve infrastructure delivery across the country, and we are working with the states to do just that. We have improved the operations of Infrastructure Australia—we made them truly independent for the first time. No longer does the minister appoint the CEO at his whim, as the member for Grayndler did last time.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

Let's understand what he did last time, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Labor minister appointed someone heavily associated with the Labor Party for five years. Then two months before the election he brought forward the next five-year contract—he gave him five years two months before an election—so let's not have this tripe that we hear from the member for Grayndler about true independence from Infrastructure Australia. That was delivered by the 'infrastructure' Prime Minister. Infrastructure Australia has got on with the audit of—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You just appoint the board who then elects the chair who appoints the CEO!

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is a complete lie.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are talking to an empty chair!

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Grayndler!

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I think he has lost touch with his senses. We are delivering infrastructure reform to Infrastructure Australia and we are working with the states to deliver more infrastructure more quickly and more efficiently. We want the states to do more and we think the states can do more; they can deliver projects better and more efficiently. We are working with them to do that because it is very important for our future—it is a very important part of our economic plan to deliver more infrastructure right across Australia, whether it be road, rail or improved freight networks. By the end of the year we will have a 15-year plan that Infrastructure Australia is now working on with the states, local government and the Australian community. We are a government that consults; we are a government that listens; but we are a government that delivers.

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have heard from the assistant minister, but we have not heard the assistant minister refute the claim in his own budget papers that there will be a $2 billion cut to infrastructure in Australia over this year and the next year. We did not hear the assistant minister try to refute it, because it is true—it is in their budget papers. We have seen the Deputy Prime Minister do his re-announcement tour around the country. He came to Tasmania and so did the assistant minister, but they did not bring any money with them. What they brought to Tasmania was cuts in their re-announcement tour.

For quite a few years we have heard from the Prime Minister, from Liberal members when they were candidates and from the current premier in Tasmania about the need to duplicate the Midland Highway. In the last couple of weeks the assistant minister has been down to Tasmania and had to confess that they would not be able to duplicate the Midland Highway for $400 million. Of course, we told them it was closer to $3 billion to duplicate the highway. They said they would duplicate it for $400 million, but Labor already had $500 million on the table for the Midland Highway. So there has actually been a cut of $100 million to safety improvements on the Midland Highway. We have heard a lot of rhetoric from the Liberal members about the need for safety upgrades to the Midland Highway, but they have ripped $100 million out of its infrastructure.

Not only that, but we also had invested $120 million in freight rail in Tasmania—a very important investment that I thought those opposite actually agreed with. Indeed, they said they had agreed with it in the past, as they did to all the other Labor commitments for infrastructure in Tasmania. But there is a cut to freight rail of $30 million this year and another $30 million next year—$60 million coming out of freight rail. We heard the secretary of the department in estimates admit this cut and say that they had taken this money and put it into irrigation in Tasmania—both are great projects, but both should be funded by the federal government. Tasmania needs that irrigation investment, but we also need the freight rail to get stuff out of the state. We need to put our produce on that rail and out of the state. It is another important investment that has gone missing. We are now up to $220 million coming out of the state of Tasmania for infrastructure to date.

The government did commit to some of the great projects that the member for Grayndler and I had agreements for in my electorate—the Tasmanian Highway ramps—but unfortunately the state Liberal government has delayed construction of that project. We announced $15 million, but it is six months behind schedule. A little work has started, which I am really pleased to see. Other projects are also behind schedule: the state Liberal government is behind schedule on the Huon Highway, $17½ million, the Domain Highway, $4 million, the Brooker Highway, $25.6 million. They are all great projects, but they are all behind schedule because of the federal and state Liberal governments. They are just the cuts to infrastructure in Tasmania.

We have also seen cuts in the budget to financial assistance grants to local government. This has been really important for local government. It is $925 billion over four years. Local governments have primarily been spending this money on roads. And primarily in regional areas, this cut to financial assistance grants will hurt. It is a cut that local government right across the country is angry about, and those opposite know it. They know that local government is not investing because of this cut of almost $1 billion over four years to local government right across the country.

In my home state of Tasmania, $18 million has been cut from local governments. That is $18 million that local government in Tasmania no longer has to spend on local roads in our state. Those opposite come in here and say, 'We have got our new bridges program,' but they have cut money from that this year; $60 million has been cut from the bridges program. They talk about doubling Roads to Recovery, a great project— (Time expired)

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition talk about a $2 billion story. I have got a $2 billion story to tell as well. At the last election there was a big distinction on the North Coast of New South Wales between the commitments of each side to the duplication of the Pacific Highway. Let's make this very clear. Labor went to the last election with $3.5 billion on the table to complete the duplication. They wanted the state government to go fifty-fifty and also put $3½ billion on the table. This is even though, when there was a state Labor government—this is an important part of the story—the federal Labor government were happy to fund that duplication at 80 federal and 20 state. When there was a change of government in New South Wales, suddenly federal Labor only wanted to fund the duplication at fifty-fifty. So they were going from 80-20 back to fifty-fifty.

We talk about $2 billion story. What did we do? As a coalition in opposition at the time, we said, 'If we win government we will maintain the funding at 80-20.' So the $2 billion story here is this: at the last election, the coalition opposition said that we would put over $5 billion of federal money on the table to complete the duplication, and the then Labor government went with $3 billion. So that is a $2 billion story.

The reason for this is very important. We know that duplication of a highway saves lives. There are lots of jobs created during construction. There is better transport, along with the commerce that that brings. Given that we put $5.5 billion on the table to complete this highway—$2 billion more than the Labor government promised—we are getting on with the job. Just last month we announced the winning tender for the 165-kilometre section of the highway from Woolgoolga to Ballina. Pacific Complete have won that tender. It is under a new delivery model, the tailored delivery partnership model. From the Ballina to Woolgoolga section, that will provide 3,000 direct jobs. As we know, there is always a multiple of two. Over 10,000 jobs will be created when we take into account the indirect jobs. So that is the $2 billion story there. The money is budgeted for. It is in the forward estimates that we as a federal government will be committing over $5 billion for the duplication of this highway. The Labor government was going to commit $2 billion less—again, for blatant political purposes. When there was a change from a state Labor government to a state coalition government, federal Labor suddenly pulled $2 billion from that project.

As the Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development has mentioned, we have also increased funding for Roads to Recovery, which is very important in my electorate. This year Ballina Shire Council will get over $1 million. They normally get about $600,000. They are getting double that this year. The Lismore City Council is getting double—over $800,000 more. Clarence Valley Council is going to get $1½ million more than they normally do. Richmond Valley Council is going to get an extra $700,000. Kyogle Council is going to get an extra $700,000 as well. Again, there is an increased infrastructure spend in my electorate. We have increased black spot funding. A few weeks ago I announced a number of projects in my electorate for black spot funding. We have change the formula for that funding, so more money will go to it—nearly $900,000 to Ballina Shire Council, $500,000 to Lismore City Council, and Kyogle Council and Richmond Valley Council will each get a few hundred thousand dollars.

So there is a $2 billion story, and the big $2 billion story for me and for my electorate was that the previous federal Labor government pulled $2 billion from the project. They did it simply for political purposes. They wanted to go from an 80-20 split to a fifty-fifty split because of a change in government. My electorate saw that as quite a cynical ploy. I was very pleased that the opposition Deputy Prime Minister at the time, Warren Truss, agreed to keep the funding split at 80-20, which was an increase of $2 billion towards that project.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You may proceed.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The previous speaker, the member for Page, alleged that we cut $2 billion from the Pacific Highway. The fact is that the former government, under me as minister, put $7.6 billion into the Pacific Highway in the budget, which compares with $1.3 billion under the former Howard government over double the time.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just before the budget we had the Prime Minister come to town to tell the people of Western Australia that after the sterling efforts made by members of his team he was actually going to take note of the problem that Western Australia had with its GST, and that he agreed that it was unfair that Western Australia was only getting 30 cents in the dollar for its GST. So he was going to make up the gap between what we got last year, which was 37 per cent, and what we were going to get under this new, highly dodgy process that the Grants Commission had embraced. He was going to make the difference up. He was going to give us $499 million. I thought that was great. He is going to give the state of Western Australia a one-off grant. He could not get that resolution on the matter, but he was going to give Western Australia a one-off grant of $499 million. We welcome that. I publicly welcomed it. It was good, following on from the announcement Labor had made a couple of weeks before, that we were going to give a cash grant to Western Australia if we got into government.

However, I thought we should just wait until the budget comes down, because what will be incredibly interesting to see is whether or not we have robbed WA to pay WA. And, sure enough, we have. Sure enough, when we look in the budget over the four years of the forward estimates, we see the one-off grant, the $499 million, was for road infrastructure. We are going to be $499 million better off. But, when we look in the infrastructure budget we see Western Australia has, indeed, $250 million dollars stripped out of the budget. So, he has given us $499 million dollars in one hand, and made much of it. My good friend the member for O'Connor was really excited by this and put a release out saying he 'welcomed the Commonwealth government's investment of an additional $499 million for road infrastructure in Western Australia'. He did not mention that we were actually going to lose $250 million, so in fact what we are getting is $249 million.

Much of the loss has come from scaling back and moving out the much vaunted Perth Freight Link, which indeed is the only new project that this government has undertaken in Western Australia. All the other projects were substantially in the budget. The Perth Freight Link, as the assistant minister was saying earlier on, is a very exciting project. It is an extraordinarily exciting project! It is a project the changes on a daily basis—as they find more and more problems with this cobbled together project they are coming up with new solutions each day. Now we are thinking that in fact this project is going to involve a tunnel—a massive tunnel—which, of course, will add, at the very least, one would expect, some $400 million to the cost of this project. So it now will be something in the order of a $2 billion project, going into a port, which, on the government's own analysis that they put in their alleged business case for this project, will be out of date and will need to be replaced within the next 10 years—indeed, according to this, within eight years. So, within two years—if this actually gets built and they can finally determine what the route is—they are going to be required to build, and have completed, the first stage of a new port down in Cockburn Sound, a port that has indeed been on the cards for the last 10 years at least. We are spending all of this money to try to cobble together a solution going into Fremantle port. Why are we doing this? We are doing this because we took $500 million out of Western Australia. (Time expired)

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an extraordinary MPI today. To have the member for Grayndler, with his glass jaw, get up and give a personal explanation in the middle of an MPI just shows how outrageous this is. This government is making $50 billion of commitments in productivity enhancing infrastructure. We have initiated a $5 billion Asset Recycling Initiative, and that just shows that we are committed to building the infrastructure that our cities, our regions and our country need.

Today I wanted talk about a project that is going to be a millstone around the neck of the Labor Party in the Victoria, and that is the abandonment of the East West Link project—the single biggest infrastructure project in the country. We have seen the member for Grayndler, the opposition leader and all the members that sit over there in Victoria standing shoulder to shoulder with Daniel Andrews, who has spent up to $1 billion not to build the East West Link—even after the Premier of Victoria said that he would not spend one dollar to cancel the contract. We have seen up to $1 billion of hard-earned taxpayers dollars spent not to build a piece of infrastructure that Rod Eddington said in 2008 was the most crucial piece of infrastructure that Victoria needed. The Leader of the Opposition signed two submissions to that inquiry saying that it was important for jobs and for the Victorian economy. Has the opposition leader changed his mind? Yes, unfortunately. Finally, we got him to answer. Because for months and months he squirmed and wiggled and would not answer the question. Finally we nailed him, and he said, 'No, I support Daniel Andrews cancelling the East West Link contract and spending up to $1 billion to do so.' Just a couple of weeks ago, Infrastructure Australia released their report on the infrastructure needs for Victoria. It highlighted the two greatest areas that would have the biggest impact on the Victorian economy—$9 billion per year. The worst traffic congestion in Victoria was highlighted as being between CityLink and the Eastern Freeway and the Eastern Freeway itself—$9 billion of costs to the Victorian economy. The East West Link would have addressed those two bottlenecks the most. That is $9 billion of drag on the Victorian economy now, in addition to the $1 billion that was splashed up against the wall by the Labor Party, with the full support of the opposition leader and the full support of every Victorian member in this House today.

Our record is proud on infrastructure. We want to build the East West Link, and we have committed that $3 billion will remain there for any future Victorian government that will build it. And let's be honest: it is going to be built. The East West Link will be built, and everybody will look at that $1 billion that was wasted as an absolute crying shame. Indeed, last week the Prime Minister announced another great project for Victoria. Putting aside our disappointment at the outrage of the East West Link, we are committing $150 million to complete the M80 ring road between Sunshine Avenue and the Calder.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You took 500 out last year, you idiot!

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Grayndler is out of order.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is absolutely outrageous that the state Labor Party would then come, cap in hand, after splashing $1 billion against the wall. But for the benefit of Victorians we will put that aside, because we will not punish Victorians for the reckless decisions of Labor. And the member for Grayndler supported the East West Link, alongside the opposition leader, until they had a conversion—a late conversion before the state election. Unfortunately you are all bound to support Dan Andrews, and I know in your heart of hearts you think it is an outrageous decision. You should put your constituents first, get up in this House and say, 'We will not support someone creating the sovereign risk and ruining the liveability of our suburbs,' because, I am sorry to say, Labor, not everybody lives within three kilometres of the CBD. I know that is all you are worried about, and you are trying to appease the Greens, and those who do not live within a three-kilometre radius of the CBD are forgotten. Well, I am sorry; my constituents need to use their cars. My constituents need to get on the Eastern Freeway, and that is why we are committing $3 billion. It will remain available for the East West Link, and it will remain a millstone around your necks until election day, because Victorians want the East West Link built. I can assure you that everyone in the outer eastern suburbs wants it built, and it will be built.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is astonishing listening to members opposite trying to defend the indefensible. This Abbott Liberal government has an appalling record when it comes to investment in infrastructure. As the Leader of the Opposition outlined in his budget reply:

This is the first Budget in living memory with not one significant infrastructure project funded.

Not one. The latest figures for infrastructure investment show public sector spending on infrastructure falling by 17.3 per cent between the December quarter of 2013 and the December quarter of 2014, with private sector spending falling by 12 per cent. In contrast, under the federal Labor government Australia's national investment level as a proportion of GDP rose from No. 20 to No. 1 in the OECD in 2011 and 2012.

While I accept that it is a hard task for members opposite to try to beat No. 1, no-one—I repeat: no-one—anticipated this government's dissent into complete high farce when it came to infrastructure in Australia—the grand magical mystery tour that this government embarks on as it zips around the country re-announcing, renaming, rebranding, reallocating and recycling Labor's funding and commitments in infrastructure. It is in fact very fitting of a cameo appearance in utopia, where nation building becomes theatre of the absurd. That is what it is like watching these guys trying to defend their appalling record in infrastructure in Australia. Over 18 months they have re-announced literally dozens of projects. I must say, the member for Grayndler has done a sterling job in bringing it to the House's attention each and every time, and I congratulate him for doing so.

But in addition to renaming, rebranding, recycling, reallocating and re-announcing, there is a sixth R that should be added into this, and that is of course 'ridiculous'—the ridiculous nature by which this government tries to defend the indefensible. My electorate of Newcastle and the neighbouring areas of the Lake Macquarie and Hunter regions form Australia's largest regional economy, generating an estimated $38.5 billion. But we are a region that is completely ignored by this government. As the Newcastle Herald pointed out in its budget wrap-up this year:

Mr Hockey's first Budget a year ago was light on capital works detail for the Hunter … and this document follows suit.

That is the assessment of my region of your second budget—nothing in there in infrastructure for the Hunter region. We have seen no new funding for infrastructure and millions pulled from major enabling projects. The Glendale transport interchange, a really important piece of infrastructure in the seat of my colleague and neighbour the member for Charlton, has been identified by Regional Development Australia, by their RDA Hunter Committee, as our region's No. 1 priority piece of infrastructure. It is needed for the continued growth and development of our region. Was there any funding in this budget for a Glendale interchange? Nothing. How about the 11 combined Hunter councils that unanimously identified it as the most strategically significant infrastructure project in the region? Does it appear anywhere in the Abbott government's budget papers? Well, in the words of this Prime Minister: Nope. Nope. Nope. What about high-speed rail? High-speed rail has the potential to completely transform the city of Newcastle. But, again, the Abbott Liberal government has taken it completely off the table. The $52 million in seed funding that Labor provided for high-speed rail planning and corridor protection was pulled from the budget and not restored by this one that we saw just a couple of weeks ago.

We are just 150 kilometres from Sydney, yet the journey by road or rail today takes between two and three hours. High-speed rail could transform our local economy. It is wanted by businesses in our community, it is wanted by the commuters in our community and it is wanted by our manufacturers. So, why doesn't this government step up to the mark, start investing in infrastructure in Australia and understanding the needs of regional communities like Newcastle and the Hunter and put some money in there where it is needed most?

Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Earlier on I was listening to the member for Perth and I was quite incredulous that someone could have such a hide on the issue of transportation infrastructure. Let's just get things in perspective here. On 5 May the member said Freight Link is a 'scandalous squandering of taxpayers' funds'. Let me tell you what is a scandalous squandering of taxpayers' funds. A minister in the WA government decided that she did not like Roe stage 8 and that she also did not like the Fremantle Eastern Bypass. So what happened is that Roe 8 was designed in a spaghetti junction deliberately to try to prevent any further staging from Roe stage 7 into Roe stage 8. It was designed to terminate. I asked the engineers at the time, 'Why have you designed it like this, so that it cannot continue?' They said, 'We had instructions to do so.'

The fascinating thing is that she removed the Fremantle Eastern Bypass. I was on the standing committee of transport and I asked the head of her department what research had been done to indicate that the Fremantle Eastern Bypass should be removed. His answer was: 'It was a state government decision.' I asked him again: 'What studies have been conducted that indicate that this is the right thing to do?' He answered in exactly the same political way again: 'It was a state government decision.' In other words, there were no studies. It was just a purely political decision to wipe the Fremantle Eastern Bypass off the map.

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

The incredible thing is that the member for Perth is complaining now about how much it is going to cost for the tunnel to go to Fremantle. Boy, talk about 'pot meet kettle'! The Fremantle Eastern Bypass which would have given a surface road that would have enabled easy access to the port has been deleted and the land has been sold by the member for Perth. Now we have to tunnel underneath to get to the Fremantle port because the minister had the audacity to sell off a bypass reserve purely to satisfy her colleague's constituents in that part of the Fremantle electorate. So removing the Fremantle Eastern Bypass was effectively all about vote buying.

Here is something that is a further concern. If you speak to, for instance, a whole lot of road engineers and councils and so on in my electorate, they will tell you that they are very concerned. We have the Fiona Stanley Hospital coming up to full steam at the moment. It is causing massive congestion in that area.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's built on a railway line.

Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member obviously does not live in the area because she has not seen the congestion there almost 12 hours a day. It is a very serious issue, Member for Perth, when you have ambulances that are not easily able to get in because of significant congestion for the majority of the day because you deleted a bypass and also tried to get rid of the ability to get to Roe stage 8 in order to simply satisfy the votes that you saw as necessary for getting the seats that you required. There was no study done to indicate that the Fremantle Eastern Bypass should be removed. It was a blatant political decision. It is as simple as that. That is a disgrace.

For my electorate, the work that is being done by our government in funding Freight Link is very much welcomed. People are sick and tired of the congestion in my electorate. They see Roe stage 8 as a very welcome piece of relief. They are relieved that they are going to get some relief from the traffic snarl-up that is there every single day with roe stage 7 and the Kwinana Freeway. It is a debacle and your design stinks.

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a debate about nation building, about competing visions for delivering the infrastructure to lead us to a more productive, more liveable and more sustainable future. It is really interesting that the member for Tangney ended by talking about debacles, because 'debacle' sums up beautifully the government's failing in this regard. It is nothing less than a debacle. This debate has demonstrated the intent of government members to add insult to injury. We have heard from the member for Perth about what has happened in WA. we have heard from the member for Newcastle about the neglected infrastructure needs of her community and the wider Hunter. We heard from the member for Franklin about the cruel neglect of Tasmania.

I am going to speak a little bit about the biggest loser in infrastructure, and that is my state of Victoria. It has 25 per cent of Australia's population and it will receive eight per cent of infrastructure investment under this government. This is at a time when Melbourne is growing enormously, as the member for Gellibrand knows, and certainly as I and my friend the member for McEwen know looking at the suburbs that we represent. Melbourne faces enormous challenges in getting the infrastructure mix right, and what do we get from this government? Nothing. It has walked away from any responsibility for urban policy.

As the member for Grayndler pointed out, even though we have paid for it, we still have not seen the State of Australian cities report for last year, a document which should be informing our decision making this year. It is just extraordinary. It is just one example.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Who is the minister?

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Who is the minister?' the member for Griffith asks me. That is a very good question. I am glad everyone is sitting down here, because the Deputy Prime Minister, the responsible minister, said something interesting in question time today. I was shocked. Deputy Speaker Goodenough, you seem shocked too, and you should be. He recognised that Australia is the most urbanised country in the world. But what has he done? The first act of this government was to abolish the Major Cities Unit, and we see a policy of bad investment in urban infrastructure driven by one thing and one thing only: the Prime Minister's personal and pathological hatred of public transport.

We talk about adding insult to injury, but the member for Deakin seems to have missed November's state election. It was an election described, in this place, by the Prime Minister and the responsible minister—by the assistant minister too, and what a compelling contribution he made in this debate; he almost got his 10 minutes. The member for Deakin, in his contribution, took us to the Infrastructure Australia audit. I am glad he did, because that is a very interesting audit.

It tells us about the state of our cities, even though the government's own bureaucracy has walked away from this. It tells us about the increasing cost of congestion. It tells us about the urgent need to invest in urban passenger rail. Funny that, because the Melbourne Metro project was the No. 1 rated project by Infrastructure Australia. It sat alongside very significant public-transport projects in Perth and Brisbane—the Cross River Rail, as my friend the member for Griffith would be well aware. These are the sorts of projects that productive, liveable and sustainable cities need. These are the sorts of projects Australia's economy needs. Melbourne, particularly, is projected to grow to a population of eight million by 2050. Increasing our road capacity is vital in growing areas, but it is not sufficient to meet the needs of Melbourne's economy or the challenges of Australia's economy into the future.

We see here a rejection of the evidence that the member for Deakin put forward in favour of the views of the Prime Minister, who seems to think people prefer cars to trains. He only needs to come to South Morang station on the border of my electorate and the member for McEwen's to see the alternative, particularly in a city like Melbourne, where jobs growth is highly concentrated in the centre of the city. There is only one way to get in and out of where jobs are, from suburbs that the member for Lalor represents, the member for McEwen represents and I represent—that is, by heavy rail. Melbourne needs this investment and Australia needs this investment if we are serious about meeting infrastructure challenges of the future.

It is not simply about rebadging projects and getting to announce them wearing a hard hat. It is about taking seriously where Australia is going, how our cities are being transformed, where the jobs of the future are being located and, fundamentally, how we help people live better, more sustainable and more productive lives. This is a profound challenge and one this government has failed.

Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One of the problems with opposition members constantly talking down our great nation is that negativity impacts on how the world sees us. That, in turn, impacts on whether people feel confident to invest in things here, like infrastructure. Let me keep it positive and tell you about some really good things our government is working hard to achieve, in regional Australia, when it comes to infrastructure.

Regional Australia creates the real wealth for our nation. In fact, two-thirds of our export earnings come from regional Australia. That is why I am proud to stand with a coalition that offers a real chance to expand future infrastructure in Northern Australia. The future development of Northern Australia—from the Tropic of Capricorn northward—is important to our nation's agricultural and resource future.

Our government is providing a new $5 billion Northern Australia infrastructure facility. This facility will be available for major infrastructure projects, like ports and railways—to transport food and commodities to ships waiting to export it—through to pipelines and electricity generation. Investment in this type of infrastructure is important because Northern Australia has untapped potential.

When it comes to Northern Australia, in my role to represent Capricornia, I will continue to push water-infrastructure projects, like the Fitzroy Agricultural Corridor, Urannah Dam and the longer-term future construction of Connors River Dam. Near Rockhampton, federal coalition MPs in Central Queensland are continuing to push the case for the Fitzroy Basin. We know this is being seriously considered by our government as an important piece of regional infrastructure.

Let me outline some of our other successful policies that go a long way to boost investment in infrastructure. Our work to secure free trade agreements with Japan, Korea and China provide preferential access to a market of over 1.5 billion people. This puts our home-grown industries in the driver's seat of lucrative Asian markets. Back home, increased business due to free trade deals means an increase in local production. This, in turn, means increased private investment in Australian infrastructure, from port facilities to on-farm or factory infrastructure, to satisfy new demands for our food and products.

The 2015-16 budget reaffirms our government's $50 billion infrastructure-investment commitment. We are spending $300 million over the next few years, through our Bridges Renewal Program, to help repair or replace old bridges across the nation. And we are fixing roads through the largest infrastructure investment in Commonwealth history, including $6.7 billion to upgrade the Bruce Highway and up to $1.3 billion for the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing. In fact, when it comes to roads, my electorate of Capricornia spans 91,047 square kilometres. For country people, roads are often the only form of travel available.

Under local road infrastructure projects, our government will spend $35 million to replace four bridges on the notorious Peak Downs Highway;·$166 million to fix the Eton range section of the Peak Downs Highway leading to the coalfields, with the first instalment of $30 million paid in 2015-16; and a further $500 million on works to fix up the Bruce Highway in regional Queensland, including Rockhampton to St Lawrence, Sarina and Mackay. This includes a further instalment on the Yeppen South project, which is raising the Bruce Highway near Rockhampton.

When it comes to local councils, we are investing $2.5 billion to help councils fix streets and roads under our Roads to Recovery program. In fact, in the latest budget we have doubled this investment on the ground. Rockhampton, Livingstone, Isaac, Whitsunday and Mackay councils will receive double their normal road-maintenance allocation—worth up to $10 million—across Capricornia towns. This is under the Commonwealth's Roads to Recovery fund. This includes: Isaac Regional Council, over $2.1 million; Livingstone Shire Council, over $1.2 million; Mackay Regional Council, over $2.8 million; Rockhampton Regional Council, over $2.1 million; and Whitsunday Regional Council, nearly $1.5 million.

Investing in infrastructure is important to this government. In doing so, our aim is also to help build jobs, growth and opportunity and provide a credible path to budget surplus.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion is now concluded.